Wenn ein Task, den man nicht entfernt hat, aktualisiert wird, dann werden bei der Aktualisierung alle Pakete des Tasks installiert.
Das ist einerseits zwar schon sinnvoll, andererseits kommt dann aber der bereits genannte "Nebeneffekt" der wiederauftauchenden, zuvor deinstallierten Pakete zustande.
Bitte Änderung der Vorinstallierten Plugins im e2
-
-
Ja Ich wäre auch dafür, Ich nutze DM 8000 nur als Satelliten Empfanger mit Aufnahmemöglichkeit.
-
.
-
Du hast den "task-opendreambox-enigma2" deinstalliert? Da stecken nämlich die meisten Plugins drin.
-
Hello all
And at compile OE2.0 how should I proceed to add or remove plugins
you can not apply the procedure of OE1.6 in OE2.0, some one can enlighten me please
hello -
+10
-
Hello all
And at compile OE2.0 how should I proceed to add or remove plugins
you can not apply the procedure of OE1.6 in OE2.0, some one can enlighten me please
helloI actually do use the same method I used before, but it was already written like an overlay.
Basic example to remove some plugins from task-opendreambox-enigma2:
Code
Alles anzeigenPR .= "-ritzmo1" DEPENDS += "\ " RDEPENDS_${PN} += "\ enigma2-plugin-extensions-teletext \ " # remove inhibited packages from configuration # soft-patching this makes us independent from original recipe python() { inhibitPackages = ( 'task-opendreambox-modem', 'enigma2-plugin-systemplugins-tempfancontrol', 'enigma2-plugin-systemplugins-crashlogautosubmit', 'tuxbox-tuxtxt-32bpp', ) depends = bb.data.getVar('DEPENDS', d, True).split() pn = bb.data.getVar('PN', d, True) rdepends = bb.data.getVar('RDEPENDS_'+pn, d, True).split() rrecommends = bb.data.getVar('RRECOMMENDS_'+pn, d, True).split() for package in inhibitPackages: while package in depends: depends.remove(package) while package in rdepends: rdepends.remove(package) while package in rrecommends: rrecommends.remove(package) bb.data.setVar('DEPENDS', ' '.join(depends), d) bb.data.setVar('RDEPENDS_'+pn, ' '.join(rdepends), d) bb.data.setVar('RRECOMMENDS_'+pn, ' '.join(rrecommends), d) }
Please note that this is not meant to be perfect and certainly not guaranteed to work forever.
But it was way easier for me to just reuse my old method (as I just had to switch this from being an existing recipe which includes the base to an bbappend which does the same thing without changing its name :D) than to look for alternative and possibly cleaner ways (there are some more "native" ways than fiddling with the bb vars directly, but they are not as flexible and make things even less readable).Oh, and I know that the teletext/tuxtxt switch is no longer needed, but it doesn't hurt either and worked around the initial awkwardness for me.
-
+1